From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:14:00 -0400 From: Rik van Riel Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 17/25] Mlocked Pages are non-reclaimable Message-ID: <20080610171400.149886cf@cuia.bos.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20080610033130.GK19404@wotan.suse.de> References: <20080606202838.390050172@redhat.com> <20080606202859.522708682@redhat.com> <20080606180746.6c2b5288.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080610033130.GK19404@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Nick Piggin Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, eric.whitney@hp.com List-ID: On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:31:30 +0200 Nick Piggin wrote: > If we eventually run out of page flags on 32 bit, then sure this might be > one we could look at geting rid of. Once the code has proven itself. Yes, after the code has proven stable, we can probably get rid of the PG_mlocked bit and use only PG_unevictable to mark these pages. Lee, Kosaki-san, do you see any problem with that approach? Is the PG_mlocked bit really necessary for non-debugging purposes? -- All Rights Reversed -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org